|
You're trying to defend life+ copyright on the basis of things happening at the very start of the copyright period. Again, I am not advocating use of contract law in that way, I'm saying that it simply makes mincemeat of the argument that you need copyright that long for that reason.
This is bluntly silly. If you want to defend life+ fine, but it sounds very much to me like you cannot come up with any good arguments except "but I think it's a good idea". And bluntly unless you can come up with a good solid argument you're heading for my ignore list for idioticy.
|